Cooler Master Gemini II *drool*

L31mr0d

Looks like the Tuniq might have a run for its money, can they get any BIGGER???

full review over at Hexus *drool*

Cooler master Japan specs









Looks like its set for only a Euro release atm. Methinks my Tuniq is going to replaced sooner than I thought, i'll wait to see some benchie results first though.

Anti

bit of a beast isn't it.

Col_Loki

Wow that is a monster!! Guess big is best......would also like to see some benchmarks.

TonyM.

I am looking at coolers at the moment how about the Titan Armada

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HS-001-TI

anybody ever use it?

Anti

Yep, that was my first cooler for my c2d, its a pile of sh1te to be honest, the tuniq will knock 5c off at full load.

Its also a little fecker to mount.

Anti

Also looking at the second picture down, there apears to be a 1cm hang over, past the mobo. And it looks even more in the pic i posted. This could cause havock in most cases. Espicially if you plan to use the rear exhaust fans.

uhh ooohh.

awhir

LOOKS NICE.

L31mr0d

where'd you get that image from? Looks like my thoughts on this cooler where right. The main drawback of the Tuniq is that there is no air being blown onto the motherboard to keep it cool as well as the CPU, i'd say this cooler will be on par with the Tuniq for CPU cooling, but where it will come into its own will be keeping the chipset/PWM cool as well.

awhir

L31mr0d wrote:

where'd you get that image from? .

secret

L31mr0d

yeah big secret n00basaurus, the picture has VictorWang written across the middle of it. Just asking for a friendly link, already found the source page myself

Anti

God bless your eyes. Took me 15 mins of staring at the screen to see it.

awhir

lol .got it off xtreamsystems

Hendrix89

I wish I held off getting the Tuniq

Anti

Why so? The tuniq is actually more then what you need. A zalman would have suited you. But the tuniq will lower temps, And a little birdie says there will be uprated fans for the 120 ! Keep yore eyes peeled.

Hendrix89

Well this CPU requires a hell of a lot of voltage to get me even 2.75GHz, resulting in bloody high temps so it might of been nice if i could have something able to get me even better cooling at a similar price! Still we don't know the actual performance comparison so won't judge yet..

I'll definately be looking out for the new fans though!

Overheal

I would hate to be the one to dust that heatsink off every month.....!!!

The way the processor R+D is looking now, this just may be the norm in a few years...Intell just prototyped an 80-core!!!

Anti

IBM have much higher then that. 500 core.

L31mr0d

I doubt we'll ever see a desktop 80 core, I invisage a complete architecture redesign first and a move back to less cores better ops/clock.

If you read up about the 80 core design, its purely just showing they can make them, not that there is any benefit to them (heck at present its feasible to get 1 teraflop out of 2 G80's, let alone 80 cores). Although I did like the thermal management on the die (i.e. if you need to use 4 cores for an app, it will use the 4 cores that are furthest from each other, reducing thermal interference) CPU temps will drop if they can lower the clocks but increase the architectures ability to handle more operations per clock. That or move over to a more efficient transport medium, like the present utilization of hafnium-based high-κ dielectrics by intel.

Overheal

L31mr0d wrote:

I doubt we'll ever see a desktop 80 core, I invisage a complete architecture redesign first and a move back to less cores better ops/clock.

If you read up about the 80 core design, its purely just showing they can make them, not that there is any benefit to them (heck at present its feasible to get 1 teraflop out of 2 G80's, let alone 80 cores). Although I did like the thermal management on the die (i.e. if you need to use 4 cores for an app, it will use the 4 cores that are furthest from each other, reducing thermal interference) CPU temps will drop if they can lower the clocks but increase the architectures ability to handle more operations per clock. That or move over to a more efficient transport medium, like the present utilization of hafnium-based high-κ dielectrics by intel.

contradicting statements.....

Thats what the multicore design is about: lowering the clock speed/temperature while still attempting to increase calculations per watt.

L31mr0d

Overheal wrote:

contradicting statements.....

Thats what the multicore design is about: lowering the clock speed/temperature while still attempting to increase calculations per watt.

No they aren't. Are you telling me one core with an architecture capable of 1 teraflops is going to generate more heat and require more power than powering 80 cores capable of 1 teraflop. Did you see the amount of power connectors that where needed for that 80 core CPU?